Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎


Acid_Haze

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 37.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • FloorFiller

    1190

  • Rose-Colored Boy

    1060

  • Matt42

    1040

  • eFestivals

    1008

Many of the folk here will tell you it's not all about the headliners and I agree. Yeah it's great when a band you like are headlining but also great to explore the site.

As for them holding off to get the money in, I don't think that's right, they work all year round and spend a sh*t tonne for us to be there every June so I think it's fair we can give them a bit of leeway with the lineup. Yeah we want it, but let's not slate their work eh?

True, but to have a really good time i would want to see at least 10 acts

I just really need to see who is going to be there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True but that was 97 nowadays they're not quite there

If the likes of Kasabian, the Arctics, Kings of Leon, The Verve etc etc are acceptable headliners in recent times I dont see why anyone would bat an eye lid if the Prodigy were announced to do the same.............not that Im saying this is happening mind you, but I dont think it could be classed as a "WTF? moment" if it did happen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure some people will have said the same about Kanye

That's because they were in denial.

Whilst I always though Kayne was incredibly unlikely he was still a contender.

One Direction just aren't. Their fans are almost exclusively not old enough to go to a festival on their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, but to have a really good time i would want to see at least 10 acts

I just really need to see who is going to be there

Look at last year's - I'd be surprised if you can't find 10 on there. You'll be fine.

Edited by Homer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the likes of Kasabian, the Arctics, Kings of Leon, The Verve etc etc are acceptable headliners in recent times I dont see why anyone would bat an eye lid if the Prodigy were announced to do the same.............not that Im saying this is happening mind you, but I dont think it could be classed as a "WTF? moment" if it did happen

It's about sales though I totally agree with what your saying though, the prodigy are much bigger than the verve, that one still baffles me to this day

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it just be easier / cheaper to go to a regular AC/DC show?

He is... but wants to spend £250+ to also see them at a week-long festival where he's confident he couldn't find much other entertainment... madness if you ask me (but that's Tories for you). Edited by Zac Quinn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is... but wants to spend £250+ to also see them at a week-long festival where he's confident he couldn't find much other entertainment... madness if you ask me (but that's Tories for you).

Madness indeed. One of the more bizarre things to crop up in this thread, much like his fear of 1D headlining....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at last year's - I'd be surprised if you can't find 10 on there. You'll be fine.

Looking at last year i would have seen

Jack White

Caro Emerald

Fatboy Slim

Dolly Parton

Maxi Priest

Alison Moyet

Dexys Midnight Runners

The Wailers

Blondie

Robert Plant

Black Keys

So would have been value for money

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, but to have a really good time i would want to see at least 10 acts

I just really need to see who is going to be there

And in the most diverse line-up that you are likely to encounter anywhere in World Festival LandTM, are you really unlikely to find 10 acts you want to see over the course of 5 days?!

I know already that I will unlikely watch more than 1 or 2 Pyramid acts. I know this based on the farily consistent profile of the Pyramid line-up aver the last 5-8 years. It's not my stuff. I feel quite similarly about the likely Other Stage line-up. But to suggest that I won't find oodles of stuff on WH, Park, JPT, Avalon, Acoustic, Glade...(I could go on), would be crazy.

I can understand that if you were (sad enough to want) to go to V Festival, you would want to know that the line-up was to your liking. Well, except that you may, like so many, just wanna get on it..but that's another matter. Because V is f*cking horrible, is two days of shite music and they kick you out of the (ha!) 'arena' early on, to go back to your decimated, revolting campsite.

To me, 'proper' festivals (and there are, arguably, increasingly few...) are not like that. They're about being part of something 'bigger', something communal, something apart from the real world. Don't get me wrong, I am a music obsessive (43 bands seen at Green Man last year), but it's about so much more than a succession of band sets that you could pay to see in a venue in a town/city.

To rest one's willingness to go, or moreover one's likelihood of having a really good time, on who Emily finally reveals as headliner No.3 is anathema to me...

Just my tuppence, obviously...

Ben

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lesser names have headlined previously (albeit they were more 'current')

I don't think it will be him, just continuing the process of elimination.

He could still play (3rd down maybe seems to be where they stick the older acts that aren't quite headliner status)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
    • David Byrne’s obviously got a few hits to play, but he’s not cheesy enough for the Legend Slot. Other headliner perhaps?
    • Too good for the legends slot 
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...